It could be said that the human brain is nothing more than a machine, and as we know it to be capable of thought it would be fair to surmise that therefore machines can think and it is probably this, or a similar premise that inspired AI. However, within AI there are many schools of thought. Some believe that if a computer can be programmed correctly to emulate certain human processes, then it is to all intense and purposes thinking as we do.

One of the early pioneers in the world of computers, Alan Turing, outlined a test in which participants are asked to interrogate a computer terminal in order to determine whether they are communicating with a human, or a computer program. Examples of programs which were put through the Turing test are ELIZA and SHRDLU both of which attempted to emulate one

Another area rapidly developing in AI is Parallel Distributed Processing, or neural networks. These are complex structures that emulate the brains neural structure, and are usually modelled within a computer, although in theory there is nothing to stop them being constructed electronically, or even mechanically! The effect of a neural network is similar to that in Pylyshyn's example - an electronic replacement for a part of the brain. Functionally it operates almost identically to a brain and can be made to do tasks similar to those performed by Schank's story program. Could a neural network equivalent be said to have any more 'causal properties' than just a computer program ?

Searle frequently refers to 'causal properties' and 'intentionality' stating that the artificial system proposed by Hofstadter would lack both of them, and that somehow the human brian has both. It is here where the subject of duality comes into the fore. Are the mind and the brain one and the same, or are they separate entities ? Many religions favour this dualist approach and refer to the mind, as it is in this instance, as a persons soul and regard it as being separate to the physical self. Whether the mind is separate or not, Searle's argument implies that the human brain has a mind, because of its natural causal properties, yet an artificial machine does not. But what are these natural causal properties, and from what do they derive ? Are they a result of the biological material from which the brain is made, are they a result of the brain's structure or are they a result of a breath of life from the lips of a god ?

Sitting isolated in a room, Searle is given a wad of Chinese script, followed by another. In addition he is given a list of English rules, for correctly correlating the two. By simply following the English rules, he writes a third set of chinese words which he then returns to someone outside the room. If the first set of script was a story, the second a s

Some topics in this essay:
Distributed Processing, Schank Yale, Chinese Hofstadter, Zenon Pylyshyn, AI AI, Alan Turing, ELIZA SHRDLU, John Searle1984, , computer program, human brain, understanding story, natural causal, neural network, natural causal properties, 'causal properties', english rules, chinese demon, emulate human, ai ai,